Monday, November 14, 2011

In addition to the “Wahl Memo” which was the narrowly considered subject of the November 1, 2011 North Dakota Supreme Court Disciplinary Board Hearing Panel in the case of Cynthia M. Feland, lots of other discovery was withheld by prosecutors from defendant Blunt.

On August 5, 2010 I obtained from the North Dakota Attorney General’s Office the four Reports of Investigation written by North Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI) Special Agent (SA) Michael Quinn. Those reports had as attachments hundreds of pages as well as digital media. Defendant Blunt was given a tiny fraction of the material before his trial.

NONE OF THE FOUR BCI REPORTS AUTHORED BY QUINN WERE PROVIDED TO BLUNT

Prior to obtaining this material I make complaint(s) in April 2010 to the North Dakota Supreme Court Disciplinary Board (Disciplinary Board) regarding Richard Riha, Lloyd Suhr, and Cynthia Feland, all of the Burleigh County State’s Attorney’s Office (BCSAO) it was asserted by me as complaint item #6 SA Quinn of BCI had interviewed numerous person, many who were called as witnesses against Mr. Blunt by the prosecutors and that but for a single page, none of the interview materials had been provided to Mr. Blunt prior to his December 2008 trial. Riha, Suhr, and Feland all signed the same response to my complaint in which they stated that:

Allegation 6:

Mr. Cates asserts that the undersigned, through leadership, purposeful action, or acquiescence, willfully allowed and/or supported the withholding of prosecution witness statements from Mr. Hoffinan during the discovery process. Specifically, he alleges that notes prepared by Special Agent Mike Quinn (Quinn) during interviews with various witnesses (Billi Peltz and Jim Long) were not produced after request. He also complains that no statements from Mr. Wahl were ever provided. His allegation reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the criminal investigative process.

Agent Quinn conducted multiple interviews, including interviews with Billi Peltz and Jim Long, during the criminal investigation. Commonly a law enforcement officer will take handwritten notes during an interview which are later used to prepare their official report. All reports prepared by Agent Quinn were disclosed during the discovery process. Thus, Mr. Cates' allegation that Agent Quinn's "notes" were not disclosed is inaccurate, as they were the basis for his report.

I would submit for your consideration that this response statement is a LIE. I would suggest as well that the Mr. Riha, Mr. Suhr, and Ms. Feland knew/know full well that the statement is a LIE. This response letter/document was submitted to the Inquiry Committee West.

[¶13] There was no evidence the State disclosed copies of the Wahl memorandum and Quinn's investigation report. The Wahl memorandum was a memo from Wahl to the prosecutor providing a summary of meetings and discussions he had with WSI executives about Spencer and the relocation expenses. Quinn's investigation report included notes from a telephone conversation he had with Wahl about Spencer's relocation expenses.

In concurrence, the Hearing Panel of the North Dakota Supreme Court Disciplinary Board found that:

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND RECOMMENDATION FOR SUSPENSION

November 1, 2011

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

.........

3. The Panel concludes Cynthia M. Feland did not disclose to Michael Hoffman, defense attorney for Charles Blunt, the Wahl memo, and other documents which were evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tended to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigate the offense.

Most significantly, material evidence included as attachments to SA Quinn investigation reports not provided included: